[WXC/VFX] WAG54GP2v2 and QoS

Forums › One NZ (including Farmside) › [WXC/VFX] WAG54GP2v2 and QoS

ajobbins

5053 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1279

Trusted

#15427 22-Aug-2007 13:56

I'm looking at replacing my current dsl router with a Linksys WAG54GP2v2. I'm not too worries about the voice ports on it at the moment seeing as I am using an SPA942 however they may come in handly down the track.

What i want to know is, will the WAG54GP2v2 provide suitable QoS to the SPA942? I am having some quality and packet loss issues at present and the guys and XNET (And I would tend to agree) think the problem may lie with the cheap and nasty Dynalink RTA1320 modem I am using.

I want to make sure if I get a new router it has better QoS to solve my quality woes (My DSL line stats are apprently very good, but the excellent folk at xnet are having Telecom run fault checks on the DSL line soon, just in case)

Griven

174 posts

Master Geek

Trusted

#83342 22-Aug-2007 15:05

Hello Adamj,

personally i have found that the Dynalink DSL modems are one of the better ones in NZ conditions, unfortunately thier routing isnt the best. On the otherhand the Linksys routing is excellent but thier DSL modems arent that great. So ideally to get the best of both worlds i would use a single port Dynalink ethernet modem connected to a WRT linksys router. Getting back to the main question you had is yes the phone connected into either the WAG or WRT will be subject to the built in QOS provided by both units.

Nicholas Cuc

Network Support
WorldxChange Communications
www.xnet.co.nz

Griven

174 posts

Master Geek

Trusted

#83345 22-Aug-2007 15:13

Also looking at your actual connection with us i can see you are currently on a DSLAM, i have requested telecom move you over to a ISAM if possible, may or maynot be contributing to the issues you are having.

Nicholas Cuc

Network Support
WorldxChange Communications
www.xnet.co.nz

ajobbins

5053 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1279

Trusted

#83348 22-Aug-2007 15:34

Thanks Nick. The correspondence I have with one of your helpdesk staff via email yesterday said they were going to try and get Telecom to fault the line, but before they would do that they needed to turn Interleaving back on, which was supposed to happen last night but I see it didnt. The support ticket is #56115

Griven

174 posts

Master Geek

Trusted

#83351 22-Aug-2007 15:43

Hello Adamj,

Just an update in regards to the 942 in behind the WAG or WRT, phil has advised me that the built in QOS will only apply to the 2 lines on the unit thus you will need to setup QOS for the VFX ports/udp ranges in the QOS tab on the GUI.

Nicholas Cuc

Network Support
WorldxChange Communications
www.xnet.co.nz

ajobbins

5053 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1279

Trusted

#83481 23-Aug-2007 13:21

Griven: Also looking at your actual connection with us i can see you are currently on a DSLAM, i have requested telecom move you over to a ISAM if possible, may or maynot be contributing to the issues you are having.

Changeover happened at 11.20am this morning. Below are the new line stats.

Quality of my VFX line seems a bit better, with a quick test call resulting in no packet loss. Still nothing close to a POTS calls however IMO. While there didnt appear to be any noticable loss of audio in our out the actual clarity of that audio was far from a POTS call. Decode latency was up around 160ms, higher than previously and jitter was around 0-1ms

On a side note, and I know you WxC guys dont support it, but I tried one of my iTalk lines which is setup on Alaw, and the quality is much much better, but it looses packets left, right and centre. Same as before the change.

Line Mode	G.DMT	Line State	Show Time
Latency Type	Interleave	Line Up Time	00:02:02:20
Line Coding	Trellis On	Line Up Count	1

Statistics	Downstream	Upstream
Line Rate	8096 Kbps	160 Kbps
Attainable Line Rate	8128 Kbps	1136 Kbps
Noise Margin	12.4 dB	26.0 dB
Line Attenuation	29.0 dB	15.5 dB
Output Power	19.8 dBm	-0.9 dBm
K (number of bytes in DMT frame)	254	6
R (number of check bytes in RS code word)	0	0
S (RS code word size in DMT frame)	1	1
D (interleave depth)	1	1
Super Frames	431761	431759
Super Frame Errors	29	0
RS Words	0	0
RS Correctable Errors	0	0
RS Uncorrectable Errors	0	0
HEC Errors	11	0
OCD Errors	0	0
LCD Errors	0	0
Total Cells	140151879	0
Data Cells	415260	0
Bit Errors	0	0
Total ES	27	4
Total SES	0	0
Total UAS	11	0

maverick

3594 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 80

Trusted

WorldxChange

#83486 23-Aug-2007 14:01

The G711 codecs will give a better Audio Quality but they are designed for a LAN type environment not a internet one, they do not handle latency and Jitter well and will be susceptabile to Packet Loss, however the Audio Quality is generally always better as it uses almost 2- 3 times the bandwidth.

So in saying that with the (42 call quality should be very good, looking at a couple of the stats we still see some dropped packets so we will contine to see if we can improve ,

Yes I am a employee of WxC (My Profile) ... but I do have my own opinions as well

https://www.facebook.com/wxccommunications

Dell

Shop now for Dell laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

coffeebaron

6304 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3567

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#83499 23-Aug-2007 15:44

I agree G711 definitely sounds much better, but I'd never use it on a 128k up link; you'd have to step up to a fs/fs plan to have any success with that. Maybe next year if / when there are dedicated VoIP channels on ADSL it may be a more viable option.

Rural IT and Broadband support.

Broadband troubleshooting and master filter installs.
Starlink installer - one month free: https://www.starlink.com/?referral=RC-32845-88860-71
Wi-Fi and networking
Cel-Fi supply and installer - boost your mobile phone coverage legally

Need help in Auckland, Waikato or BoP? Click my email button, or email me direct: [my user name] at geekzonemail dot com

ajobbins

5053 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1279

Trusted

#83503 23-Aug-2007 15:56

The packet loss I got on 711a (On my iTalk line). the other day seemed to be more on the downstream than the up. The called person had no problems hearing me (It was my grandfather I was speaking to, and his hearing has probably seen better days) but I frequently lost words or in some cases sentences coming downstream to me.

With help from Phil I will be playing with ulaw again on my VFX line soon to see what results I have with that (Just having some provisioning setting problems which Stephen is being very good and helping me out with). If FS/FS would work well with ulaw then im more than happy to pay for it, but from what Phil tells me it does not deal well with jitter and latency, which may account for alot of the packet loss I am seeing on my iTalk lines.

ajobbins

5053 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1279

Trusted

#83506 23-Aug-2007 16:02

coffeebaron: Maybe next year if / when there are dedicated VoIP channels on ADSL it may be a more viable option.

Can you explain what you mean by this?

coffeebaron

6304 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3567

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#83507 23-Aug-2007 16:14

adamj:
coffeebaron: Maybe next year if / when there are dedicated VoIP channels on ADSL it may be a more viable option.
Can you explain what you mean by this?

Maybe Phil will have more of a heads up on this one; but I believe as part of Telecom's upgrading of their network, n-dsl etc, they will soon offer a "guaranteed" bandwidth "channel". I.E. you may have a 3Mbps connection, but this needs to compete with all the data your are downloading, plus all the data everyone else on the exchange is downloading, plus all the data going between the exchange and your ISP. The idea of a dedicated voice channel (or whatever else this channel maybe used for), is to split off a small chunk of your bandwidth (say 64 or 128Kbps etc), and effectively make that a dedicated pipe between you and your ISP. Thus it won't much how much data is being used elsewhere, you have a guaranteed amount for VOIP. Basically a glorified QoS service.

I guess its like all the regular data traveling on Auckland's motorway, but your VOIP traffic traveling on its own free flowing toll road.

Rural IT and Broadband support.

Need help in Auckland, Waikato or BoP? Click my email button, or email me direct: [my user name] at geekzonemail dot com

ajobbins

5053 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1279

Trusted

#83508 23-Aug-2007 16:22

Hm, sounds great in theory but me wonders how much I would have to pay for such a service. We have already been told to expect to pay a premium for nDSL and I am sure a dedicated VoIP channel on the line would be an add-on. That could potentially push the price up to what we pay now for POTS + ADSL